"Flummoxed" No More? Looking for Guidance on Robinson-Patman from the Third Circuit's Feesers Decision
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals has issued an important Robinson-Patman Act decision, vacating a Pennsylvania district court's judgment for the plaintiff in Feesers, Inc. v. Michael Foods, Inc. The Third Circuit held that a manufacturer's customers bidding to sell products to the same account were not "competing purchasers" for purposes of assessing price discrimination under the Robinson-Patman Act where neither customer purchased the products for that account until after winning the bid. The court did not reach some thorny issues, but relieved the manufacturer of a contempt order issued by the district court.
Please join us as partners Richard Steuer and Scott Perlman offer perspective and practical advice with respect to the scope of the court's opinion, including:
- The key issues addressed by the court
- The key issues the court didn't decide
- Whether certain statements by the court are likely to further limit the rationale for the decision
- How the opinion is likely to be applied by other courts going forward